Most Johnly of HenriesIt's still sort of crazy to me that these obvious flaws in blockchains' core principles and governing entities exist, but smart people keep investing in them anyway. I guess they truly lack any sort of faith in regular governments. There's a need for "digital government journalists", who are neither embedded in old-world politics (like EFF & others) nor untrustworthy orgs who are biased by positions they hold with cryptocurrencies (like Coindesk, or other "bitcoin news").
Danny O'B@johnhenry not taking it as an insult or anything, but what do you mean by "embedded in old-world politics" in this context?
@mala Well, most people in EFF and similar organizations are busy fighting actual political battles, reporting on congressional activity, and trying to keep the current internet intact. They don't have as many resources or time to investigate or advocate on behalf of victims of crazy future crypto nerd money, and understandably so.
@johnhenry ohh I get it! well, people often abstract a complex ecology of digital activism (including journalism) into "EFF etc", where we play a very narrow role, and I don't think that would be part of it even if we had the resources. But trying to set up the environment so that would come into existence *is* part of our job I think
@mala I imagine there's a lot of overlap in values / goals, even if EFF's charter is different. I'm slowly building an organization to explain / report on "next generation" internet architectures, so imagine that at least some conversations or partnerships would be fruitful for people experienced in digital activism and outreach, broadly speaking.
@johnhenry well it's not so much a charter thing, as a theory of change. At heart, EFF is lawyers. Our skills are trying to keep things open enough so you can talk about that, and people can experiment, without getting thrown in jail just for doing so.